TrishAndHalli.com

Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, observations on life in general, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them all!

RSS Feeds, Etc.

Get New Posts Via Email! Enter your e-mail address and hit the 'Subscribe' button. Your address will never be sold or spammed.

About

Profile TrishAndHalli.com
Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them!.

Archives

Categories

Pages

Blogroll

Conservative News

General Interest

Idaho Falls Links

Idaho Politics

Left-Leaning Idaho

Libertarian Links

Pro-life Organizations


Jerry Sproul, CPA
ThoughtfulConsideration.com

Please take a moment to visit our sponsors!

Abby Johnson: Why are Planned Parenthood Abortuaries Closing?

June 19th, 2014 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

With all of these Planned Parenthood facilities closing, pro-lifers are being accused of “shutting down places that provide healthcare to women.” But, are we? Are pro-lifers closing these facilities? Last time I checked, it is Planned Parenthood who is making the decision to close down their centers. Let’s take a look at why that is happening.

Several Planned Parenthood clinics in Oregon and Iowa recently closed, citing that they simply didn’t have the clients needed to keep their clinics open. Why the lack of clients? Probably because of the lack of basic services.

The general population seems to think that Planned Parenthood does a whole lot more than they actually do. Does Planned Parenthood provide actual prenatal care? No. They actually phased out their prenatal care program a few years back, stating that the pregnant patients were “too cumbersome.” Some clinics do continue to tout that they provide this service just so they can continue to include it in their annual report. These centers provide prenatal vitamins and then log that under “prenatal care.” Planned Parenthood actually doesn’t provide any service to pregnant women except for abortion, of course. Maybe if they actually started to provide for their advertised services, they would make enough money to stay open.

Planned Parenthood states they provide care for “breast health.” But that is also a stretch. Planned Parenthood is a level-one breast cancer service center. That means they are not allowed to provide any breast health service past a manual breast exam. You know, the same type of breast exam that you do in the shower every month. It’s the same breast exam that you can receive from any nurse or doctor anywhere in the country. Planned Parenthood does not provide breast ultrasounds, breast biopsies, mammograms or anything other than manual breast exams. Maybe if they started providing women with real breast health care, they could keep their doors open.

Planned Parenthood provides no primary care. You can’t visit a Planned Parenthood if you have strep throat, a sinus infection, or the flu. They can’t treat your high blood pressure, your elevated cholesterol or to help regulate your diabetes. They have no national protocol that allows them to provide any of those primary care services. You can be seen at Planned Parenthood for limited STD screening and treatment, birth control, a limited woman’s exam or an abortion. Other than that, you are pretty much out of luck. Maybe if they started to provide these primary care services, they wouldn’t be so hard pressed to find clients.

In Texas, we have seen many Planned Parenthood facilities close shop. The reasoning here is different. Planned Parenthood is choosing to close rather than bring their current centers up to legal safety standards. In San Antonio, an annual inspection report showed that the Planned Parenthood facility had serious sterilization issues. They weren’t separating clean and dirty instruments. They weren’t testing their autoclave machine to ensure that it was still working. Lots of problems. We see this in many facilities. There was an abortion clinic in Beaumont with the same issues. They have also been cited for untrained staff, dirty equipment, expired medications given to patients…the list goes on and on. So, instead of fixing these problems, Planned Parenthood has chosen to close these facilities. They chose to close their filthy centers. Pro-lifers didn’t force them to close. They chose to close them all on their own.

You see, if Planned Parenthood was really concerned about the health and safety of women, they would be bending over backwards to implement these changes. They would be reinventing themselves as true healthcare centers that can treat primary care issues, provide prenatal care, etc. And, my goodness, they would definitely take the money and time needed to clean up their centers! But instead, Planned Parenthood has exercised their right to choose. By doing this, it is them who have let down the women in their community. They have chosen to abandon these poor women.

So, while Planned Parenthood is making their choices, we pro-lifers will step in and actually help women find the services they so desperately need. Don’t worry, Planned Parenthood, we’ll gladly pick up the slack that you have put down.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Presidential Politics, Taxes | No Comments »

David Ripley: Casey Kasem’s Fight for Life

June 12th, 2014 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

The legendary radio and TV personality made national news several weeks ago as his daughters waged a nation-wide hunt for him, alleging that their step-mother had some sinister plan to harm or even kill him. Media outlets carried their hearty pleas for help in finding their beloved father.

But developments this week sketch an entirely different picture.

Once she obtained legal custody over her father, Kerri Kasem quickly went back to court to obtain a court order allowing her to withhold medical treatment, as well as food and water from her father in a bid to expedite his death.

Standing in the way of her quest was the here-to-fore “evil” step-mother, and Kasem’s wife, Jean. Turns out that it is his wife who has been fighting to sustain his life. And she is worried that the daughters are not interested in what is best for Casey Kasem but in getting their hands on his $2 million life insurance policy.

“Only God knows when to take someone,” Jean Kasem declared.

Tragically, the court in Washington state has granted the daughter’s request to kill her father under the guise of fulfilling Casey Kasem’s last wishes. But the simple facts involved in killing a person by withholding food and water make this claim dubious at best.

Dr. David Stevens, a prominent physician with whom we have been privileged to work on various pro-Life issues, told LifeNews that people simply don’t understand how painful death is when caused by denying human beings food and water.

“Most so-called experts have never seen someone die in this manner,” said Dr. Stevens, who is also president of the Christian Medical Association. Stevens has plenty of experience with this tortuous method from his many years of work in Africa, where the leading cause of death is dehydration produced by gastroenteritis.

“There is extreme thirst, the patient becomes dizy faint and unable to sit or stand,” Stevens said. “People develop severe cramping as the sodium and potassium concentrations in the body goes as fluids go down. The patient tries to cry, but cannot produce tears. They experience severe abdominal cramps, nausea and dry-heaving as the stomach and intestines dry out. Many experience excruciating headaches, hallucinations and seizures.”

“Contrary to those that try to paint a picture of a gentle process, death by dehydration is a cruel, inhumane and often agonizing death,” Stevens said.

How many people really understand what they are signing when giving end-of-life directives? And how can a court deny the right of a spouse to defend her husband against relatives with clear conflicts of interest? And why has the media been so spectacularly silent about this latest struggle over the American icon? Could it be they are afraid of the public’s reaction to Kasem’s forced execution by denying him food and water? It is one thing for the Culture of Death to destroy a “nobody” like Terri Schiavo … but perhaps the golden voice of Rock n Roll may be another matter.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues | No Comments »

David Ripley: ALL Educates Women About the Health Risks of the Pill

June 9th, 2014 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

Washington, DC—-American Life League and nearly 60 cosponsoring organizations are coordinating a large-scale, nationwide campaign to inform women about the deadly dangers of the pill and similar hormonal contraceptives.

“The mountain of evidence that these drugs are killers cannot just be swept under the rug,” said Judie Brown, president of ALL. “We need to get out there and warn women of the dangers they face. Planned Parenthood and other pill peddlers are deceiving women and causing their deaths.”

For the next three days, organizers are planning to storm social media on Twitter and Facebook to bring light to the dangers of not just the contraceptive pill, but all other contraceptives targeted at women that damage their reproductive health.

On June 5, #ThePillKills hash tag will be posted on Twitter all day as part of ALL’s #ThePillKills Tweetstorm to bring attention to the devastating effects of the pill. “Because of hormonal contraceptives, women are dying and suffering permanent, debilitating injuries from blood clots, heart attacks, and strokes,” said Rita Diller, director of The Pill Kills campaign.

On Saturday, June 7, all across the country The Pill Kills protests and vigils will take place outside abortion clinics and pharmacies that sell contraceptives. Activists will distribute literature provided by ALL to the public, outlining all of the dangers and risks posed by contraception and contraceptive devices.

Opposition to #ThePillKills has already manifested itself on The Pill Kills Facebook page and Twitter activity, and this past Tuesday night there were attempts at sabotaging ALL’s national organizing conference call by pro-abortion and pro-contraception extremists. “Planned Parenthood does not want our message heard,” said Rey Flores, ALL director of outreach. “We will not be silenced, not when lives are at stake.”

The Pill Kills is on the web at http://thepillkills.org.

Media inquiries, please contact Rita Diller at 540.659.4171 or RDiller@ALL.org

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Presidential Politics, Taxes | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Conservative Policies vs. the President

June 9th, 2014 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

Conservatives have, from the beginning of his candidacy for the presidency seven years ago, been critical of our sitting president. It has nothing to do, contrary to some sophist’s convictions, with the color of his skin. And our criticisms are not ad hominem for they aren’t against him personally, but against his policies and what he’s doing to “fundamentally transform America.” So for political clarity, lets enumerate a few areas where conservative political policies would make such a difference to the country.

First, we would not have more than doubled the national debt from $7.6 trillion, when Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid took over, to over $18 trillion now. As Hillary Clinton said a couple years ago, that’s a national security issue, since it places our entire nation at risk, economically, fiscally, monetarily, and even in terms of our national security.

The deficit would not have quintupled from $263 billion when Pelosi/Reid took over, to $1.6 trillion during Obama’s first year, and remained at $1.3 trillion for the past two years. In other words, we would not be borrowing $.41 for every $1.00 that we spend!

Contrary to what Pelosi did after she became Speaker, and including the first term of the Obama administration, we would have actually had a budget passed by the congress. Until the concurrent resolution was passed just last year, we had not had a budget passed by congress since 2006. They’ve been simply running up the national credit cards at unprecedented levels with absolutely no budgetary restraint.

After creating an all star panel to assess the budgetary and fiscal crises exacerbated by unabated spending, the president’s Simpson-Bowles Commission recommendations to put the nation on a sound fiscal footing would not have been ignored, but implemented as judiciously and expeditiously as possible.

There is still no sign of leadership in resolving the unfunded liabilities, and exacerbated budgetary problems, of Social Security and Medicare. It’s as if the critical mass of those concerns will not be reached during his term in office, so it doesn’t matter, so all that’s occurred is a perpetual “kicking the can” down the road for some future leader who has some backbone and leadership abilities to address them.

A 2,700 page legislative monstrosity that took over 1/5th of the national economy to put government in charge of health care would never have occurred. And we certainly wouldn’t have stolen $716 billion (now $741 billion according to the CBO) from Medicare to pay for it. Instead of piling on requirements for “qualified” health insurance policies, the over 2,200 covered requirements would have been removed so people could buy exactly the coverage they want, rather than what the government compels them to buy. And policies could be bought across state lines for increased price competition.

Realizing that one of the greatest deterrents to small businesses creating new jobs is the high cost of regulation, the current $11,500 regulatory cost to small businesses per employee (per the SBA) should be reduced by getting government out of the business of micromanaging every aspect of the business environment. And certainly the regulatory burden of small business would not be exacerbated by another 30% with the additional regulatory expenses of Obamacare, FinReg, and expanded EPA regulations.

Realizing that our economic model is so severely tainted by crony capitalism, the unhealthy marriage between business and government regulation and policy, it’s time to start unwinding that interconnectedness. The federal tax code for corporations needs to be rewritten, by excluding all loopholes that are favorable to select companies and industries, and create instead a fair flat tax for corporations.

Over the past six years, the Federal Reserve, in the name of “economic stimulus,” has taken over $4 trillion out of banks hands to purchase debt instruments, through the three iterations of Quantitative Easing. There has been negligible benefit other than giving the stock market an artificial high. It’s time to rein in the Federal Reserve, get the FOMC out of the “stimulus” business, and return them to their primary functions of controlling inflation and maximizing employment.

Congress and the American people have a right to demand that the chief executive of the country be held to constitutional and legal restraints of his power. He should not act as if he is above the law by selectively picking and choosing which laws would be enforced, and declare existing laws void because the chief executive disagrees with them. And the use of the Executive Order should be used legally, based in existing federal statute, and not creating new laws and regulations with the stroke of his pen.

That’s just a beginning. I could go on and on. Those differences would contribute to a more secure fiscal and economic future for the country; a stronger dollar; greater participation in the job market and lower unemployment; a more robust economy and expanding job market; lower cost health care insurance; less crony-capitalistic corruption from the relationship between government and corporate America; less meddling in the private sector; more individual freedom; and less totalitarianism in the Oval Office.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, Pocatello Issues, Politics in General, Presidential Politics, Taxes | No Comments »

David Ripley: US Birthrate Hits New Low

June 2nd, 2014 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

America had a birth rate of 63 per 1,000 women of child-bearing age in 2013, a new record low. This continues a trend building since the Clinton Administration, in which the U.S. is following the lead of other western nations in failing to produce enough children to replace aging citizens.

The fertility rate now stands at 1.87 children for each American woman over her lifetime, well below the replacement rate of 2.1 children per female.

Certainly the explanation for America’s collective decision to demographically destroy itself isn’t for lack of the necessary sexual activity. The nation has never been more obsessed with that particular recreational activity. The enormous rate of abortion offers a ready explanation for the dwindling number of new Americans. One sixth of the population has been killed by abortion since 1973. One-in-four African Americans are killed in the womb. As Law Professor Michael Paulsen of St. Thomas notes in a recent article, abortion is the leading cause of unnatural death in America.

The economic and political implications of this demographic implosion are difficult to gauge in their totality; however, we can assume a weakened economic productivity going forward. An aging population will mean fewer resources available to care for the aged and a fierce battle over the allocation of capital for production over consumption.

One wonders where to look for the political and social leadership necessary to help our society confront the practical dangers of our present moral confusion surrounding the value of human life.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Politics in General, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Now It’s “Climate DISRUPTION”

June 2nd, 2014 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

The Obama administration this week released a grim report attempting to link disparate weather patterns to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). “Climate change, once considered an issue for a distant future, has moved firmly into the present,” the report says. Unable to make the definitive scientific connection to AGW, the report concludes, “there is new and stronger evidence that many of these increases [extreme weather] are related to human activities.”

Predictably, with a noncompliant congress, the president vows to use his pen to expand the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) power to wage a war on everything in our country that expels carbon dioxide. I wonder how the EPA will regulate our respiration, since we humans exhale it.

The president coined a new phrase as well. Gone are the references to “global warming,” since, according to NASA GIS data, we haven’t warmed since 1998. And gone is “climate change,” since we haven’t cooled appreciably since then either. The new catchphrase is “climate disruption,” because that way any extreme or aberrant weather can be blamed on human activity.

Surrounded by weathermen and meteorologists, the president said, “We’ve been sounding this urgency for the last five years. If we don’t do more, we’re gonna have bigger problems, more risk of economic impact and more risk of extreme weather events that can result in people losing their lives or losing their properties or businesses. And — and we’ve gotta have the public understand this is an issue that is gonna impact our kids and our grandkids unless we do something about it.”
I wish we had known how omnipotent the EPA was. Since the president is convinced they can control the environment and the climate, all future catastrophic hurricanes, tornadoes, blizzards, and droughts, will be the fault of the EPA! And just think of all of the weather-related damage that has occurred since the 1970 creation of the EPA, all of which could have been prevented if only they had been given more power!

Meteorologist Anthony Watts said of the president’s new report, “To me, this looks more like a glossy sales pitch from a company that is pushing a product they know people may not need, but if marketed just right, it would be something they’d buy.” He concludes with the tongue-in-cheek question, “Who wouldn’t want better weather? Just buy our product.”

Dr. Roger Pielke, a Fellow of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, was more academic in his response. “The report effectively implies that there is no climate change other than what is caused by humans, and that extreme weather events are equivalent to climate change…This issue was clearly refuted in National Research Council, 2005: Radiative forcing of climate change.”

The NIPCC, the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, which is a group of over 50 atmospheric scientists, that does not receive any government or corporate funding, and acts as an independent auditor of its U.N. counterpart, had a report of their own that they rolled out a few months ago. They stated many empirically valid conclusions, including, “Global temperatures stopped rising 15 years ago despite rising levels of carbon dioxide, which the IPCC claims is responsible for Global Warming.”

2014-03-17-d826b2de_largeThey also pointed out that, “Temperatures were warmer in many parts of the world approximately 1,000 years ago, during the so-called Medieval Warm Period, a warm period that was, obviously, due entirely to natural causes. (Modern industry, transportation, and energy generation, and the ‘greenhouse gas’ emissions associated with modern technology, did not exist.)”

They stated the obvious, that the AGW scientists are wrong, since their “computer models fail to reproduce the observed reduction in surface warming trend over the last 10-15 years. In other words, previous predictions failed. (The failure or success of predictions is the key to the scientific method. It’s how theories are tested.)”

Even the co-founder of Green Peace, Canadian ecologist Patrick Moore, admits that it’s pseudoscience to claim a causal connection between human activity and climatic or weather change. “There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years. If there were such a proof it would be written down for all to see. No actual proof, as it is understood in science, exists,” he said before a Senate committee just three months ago.

He continued, “There is some correlation, but little evidence, to support a direct causal relationship between CO2 and global temperature through the millennia. The fact that we had both higher temperatures and an ice age at a time when CO2 emissions were 10 times higher than they are today fundamentally contradicts the certainty that human-caused CO2 emissions are the main cause of global warming.” There is nothing “settled” about the “science” behind the AGW argument. Their models don’t project reality, so they change them, only to have nature fail to comply yet again. Their terminology changes to adjust to the new realities since empirical data fail to match their catchwords. Meanwhile, our AGW Alarmist-In-Chief cites their ever-changing “science” as justification to expand government control over all human activity. Seems to me, everyone with a modicum of cognitive functionality should be an AGW skeptic by now.”

The Obama administration this week released a grim report attempting to link disparate weather patterns to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). “Climate change, once considered an issue for a distant future, has moved firmly into the present,” the report says. Unable to make the definitive scientific connection to AGW, the report concludes, “there is new and stronger evidence that many of these increases [extreme weather] are related to human activities.”

Predictably, with a noncompliant congress, the president vows to use his pen to expand the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) power to wage a war on everything in our country that expels carbon dioxide. I wonder how the EPA will regulate our respiration, since we humans exhale it.

The president coined a new phrase as well. Gone are the references to “global warming,” since, according to NASA GIS data, we haven’t warmed since 1998. And gone is “climate change,” since we haven’t cooled appreciably since then either. The new catchphrase is “climate disruption,” because that way any extreme or aberrant weather can be blamed on human activity.

Surrounded by weathermen and meteorologists, the president said, “We’ve been sounding this urgency for the last five years. If we don’t do more, we’re gonna have bigger problems, more risk of economic impact and more risk of extreme weather events that can result in people losing their lives or losing their properties or businesses. And — and we’ve gotta have the public understand this is an issue that is gonna impact our kids and our grandkids unless we do something about it.”

I wish we had known how omnipotent the EPA was. Since the president is convinced they can control the environment and the climate, all future catastrophic hurricanes, tornadoes, blizzards, and droughts, will be the fault of the EPA! And just think of all of the weather-related damage that has occurred since the 1970 creation of the EPA, all of which could have been prevented if only they had been given more power!
Meteorologist Anthony Watts said of the president’s new report, “To me, this looks more like a glossy sales pitch from a company that is pushing a product they know people may not need, but if marketed just right, it would be something they’d buy.” He concludes with the tongue-in-cheek question, “Who wouldn’t want better weather? Just buy our product.”

Dr. Roger Pielke, a Fellow of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, was more academic in his response. “The report effectively implies that there is no climate change other than what is caused by humans, and that extreme weather events are equivalent to climate change…This issue was clearly refuted in National Research Council, 2005: Radiative forcing of climate change.”

The NIPCC, the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, which is a group of over 50 atmospheric scientists, that does not receive any government or corporate funding, and acts as an independent auditor of its U.N. counterpart, had a report of their own that they rolled out a few months ago. They stated many empirically valid conclusions, including, “Global temperatures stopped rising 15 years ago despite rising levels of carbon dioxide, which the IPCC claims is responsible for Global Warming.”

They also pointed out that, “Temperatures were warmer in many parts of the world approximately 1,000 years ago, during the so-called Medieval Warm Period, a warm period that was, obviously, due entirely to natural causes. (Modern industry, transportation, and energy generation, and the ‘greenhouse gas’ emissions associated with modern technology, did not exist.)”

They stated the obvious, that the AGW scientists are wrong, since their “computer models fail to reproduce the observed reduction in surface warming trend over the last 10-15 years. In other words, previous predictions failed. (The failure or success of predictions is the key to the scientific method. It’s how theories are tested.)”

Even the co-founder of Green Peace, Canadian ecologist Patrick Moore, admits that it’s pseudoscience to claim a causal connection between human activity and climatic or weather change. “There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years. If there were such a proof it would be written down for all to see. No actual proof, as it is understood in science, exists,” he said before a Senate committee just three months ago.

He continued, “There is some correlation, but little evidence, to support a direct causal relationship between CO2 and global temperature through the millennia. The fact that we had both higher temperatures and an ice age at a time when CO2 emissions were 10 times higher than they are today fundamentally contradicts the certainty that human-caused CO2 emissions are the main cause of global warming.” There is nothing “settled” about the “science” behind the AGW argument. Their models don’t project reality, so they change them, only to have nature fail to comply yet again. Their terminology changes to adjust to the new realities since empirical data fail to match their catchwords. Meanwhile, our AGW Alarmist-In-Chief cites their ever-changing “science” as justification to expand government control over all human activity. Seems to me, everyone with a modicum of cognitive functionality should be an AGW skeptic by now.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, Pocatello Issues, Politics in General, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

David Ripley: Troupis for Attorney General

May 1st, 2014 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

Let’s start with a few basics.

For many years, Chris Troupis has served as the (largely uncompensated) legal counsel for Idaho Chooses Life. He has donated countless hours to our efforts to secure greater legal protections and recognition of the humanity of Idaho’s preborn citizens. And we are not the only charitable organization that Troupis has helped during his distinguished legal career.

The present Attorney General, Lawrence Wasden, is pro-Life. He has shown up for work every time Idaho has been sued by one abortion group or another and defended the work of the pro-Life community through the Idaho Legislature.

While he has sometimes lost those legal efforts, that can not be fairly or easily laid at his feet. Despite our conservative values and culture, Idaho is oppressed by the most hostile federal judges in the country. Idaho’s district court judge, Lynn Winmill, is every bit as liberal as the 9th Circuit. Wasden’s burden, therefore, in defending even the most modest pro-Life protection against the Abortion Lobby is a heavy one.

And yet, there have been frustrations in dealing with the Attorney General’s office. We believe a better job can be done in securing the right-to-life for all Idahoans.

Chris Troupis will be a champion for the preborn child and a hard-working advocate for Idaho’s values.

Chris is a fine attorney with a great heart. He will bring a fresh vision and new energy to Idaho’s second-most important constitutional office.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Politics in General | No Comments »

David Ripley: Crane Deserves Re-Election

May 1st, 2014 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

State Treasurer Ron Crane does not have a contested primary this spring, but a word about his fine public service is in order.

Crane has served Idaho for decades, going back to his many days in the Idaho House of Representatives. He was a leader of conservative forces then, and continues so today. Crane was one of the very first legislators to receive our “Friend for Life” Award in 1998 for his leadership in securing a Ban on Partial Abortions in Idaho.

Over the past several years, Crane has endured some rather unseemly sniping from anonymous Republican legislators pursuing an agenda yet to be revealed. They have tried to insinuate that Crane is somehow incompetent or even unethical. After the headlines appear in liberal media outlets, the facts regarding various allegations never seem to garner the same attention.

Be sure of one thing: Crane is a hardworking, highly ethical public official who has done well by the citizens who have seen fit to re-hire several times as State Treasurer. We have no doubt they will do so again this year, as he will face one Democrat or another this fall.

While we certainly endorse Crane’s re-election, this posting is not so much an endorsement as it is a public “thank you” for his many years of conservative leadership.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Family Matters, Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Politics in General | No Comments »

David Ripley: The Myth of “Safe” Abortion

May 1st, 2014 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

Our friends at Operation Rescue have been digging into the documents filed by Planned Parenthood in its lawsuit to block the new Texas law requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. Apparently the huge Abortion Chain revealed that it was aware of some 210 Texas women and girls admitted annually to hospitals because of complications arising from abortions performed at their own clinics.

This tidbit is highly significant. It is, of course, very difficult to come by data relating to the medical histories and complications of women undergoing abortion. In addition to the standard protections surrounding patient privacy, there is a huge wall of secrecy erected by federal courts to safeguard the so-called “right to abortion” and to shield women from any possible social stigma related to their decision to end their babies’ lives.

Operation Rescue extrapolated the data to find that perhaps 1000 Texas women are hospitalized across the state because of problems associated with botched abortions. Each year.

That is a rather staggering piece of data, and would seem to put the lie to the notion that legalized, mechanized destruction of preborn children is somehow “safe” and free from physical and emotional consequence.

The rate of complications for chemical abortions – using RU-486 – is many times higher than that of surgical abortion.

Operation Rescue goes on to project that if the Texas experience is applied to all 50 states, American women could be suffering terrible health consequences as a result of legalized abortions. They believe it is likely that tens of thousands of women and girls – each year – could be rushing to emergency rooms and hospitals as a result of submitting to the deceptions of Planned Parenthood.

As a friend of our used to say, abortion is no favor to women.

To read the complete report, check out LifeNews .

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues | No Comments »

David Ripley: Denney for Secretary of State

May 1st, 2014 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

The Board of Idaho Chooses Life has voted to endorse the candidacy of Rep. Lawerence Denney for the position of Secretary of State.

Denney has long served Idaho through his various roles in the Idaho House of Representatives. Throughout his long public service, Denney has been an unapologetic advocate for Idaho’s preborn children. He was one of the first officials to receive our “Friend for Life” Award back when he served as Majority Leader in the House.

Denney’s opponents in this race, Evan Frasure and Mitch Toryanski, are both fine gentlemen who have previously been endorsed by this organization for other offices. But in this race, Denney’s record of public service earns him our support.

During the time that Denney served as Speaker of the Idaho House, the pro-Life movement saw unprecedented gains in establishing protections for preborn children in Idaho law. That was no accident. Lawerence made it his business to create a welcome environment; every reasonable proposal to save lives was given his personal attention.

Much has been made by the liberal press and his political enemies over his very narrow defeat to a fourth term as Speaker in December of 2012. Some have even tried to suggest that Denney had lost the confidence of his colleagues, or had somehow failed to properly fulfill his duties as Speaker.

Balderdash.

Lawerence Denney is a public leader of unusual integrity and humility. He carries the mantel of public power with a down-to-earth graciousness that is truly remarkable. He will bring that character to the office of Secretary of State.

Denney lost the Speakership for one and only one reason: An unprecedented campaign by special interest groups in the 2012 elections to elect legislators willing to support their plans to impose ObamaCare upon the People of Idaho. These interests, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, succeeded in bringing a gaggle of freshmen into the House. By combining their votes with House Democrats, they were able to create the ObamaCare Exchange. It is that simple.

Idaho deserves to have a statewide leader of Denney’s caliber overseeing our election process and serving us on the Land Board.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues | No Comments »

« Previous Entries Next Entries »

Copyright © 2oo6 by TrishAndHalli.com Powered by Wordpress          
Ported by ThemePorter - template by Design4 | Sponsored by Cheap Web Hosting